Sorry, Lou, not the way I have seen "normalized" used. Perhaps that is
related to what you are saying, if one views the exercise as raising all
the tracks to their "max." It is about balancing the relative level among
a number of tracks,not just raising one track to its max level.
On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 1:40 PM, Tim Gillett <[log in to unmask]>
> The "swish" energy is possibly full of highs and the loudest thing in the
> recording, which is why a standard denoiser wont touch it. It's looking to
> reduce low level sounds.
> The swish will also probably contain frequencies way above that of the
> wanted program, as well as above human audibility.
> For access, I'd declick and then probably subjectively filter out a lot of
> those highs, and even lows, but without an audio sample hard to be sure.
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Stamler" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2018 2:18 AM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] RX5, etc.
> On 3/4/2018 12:10 PM, Lou Judson wrote:
>>> It is also possible that the clipping sounds are from overloading the
>>> D/A, whilst the waveform is okay. It is called ï¿½intersample peaksï¿½ and
>>> one reason I avoid normalizing. Try normalizing to -1 or -2 and see if it
>>> still sounds bad. Or, as I said, use a look-ahead limiter, again instead of
>> Yet another reason why normalizing is generally a bad policy.
>>> Lou Judson
>>> Intuitive Audio
>>> On Mar 4, 2018, at 10:02 AM, Tim Gillett <[log in to unmask]>
>>> The crackling noises after normalising sound like clipping. You could
>>>> visually inspect (by magnifying) the waveform peaks both before and after
>>>> normalising. Have you tried normalising but minus a few db's?
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.